Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957]
Court: Court of Appeal
Facts: Mr. Bolam, a voluntary patient at Friern Hospital, received electro-convulsive therapy (ECT) without the use of muscle relaxants or manual restraints. He suffered injuries during the treatment and claimed that the hospital was negligent for not using these precautions or informing him of the risks associated with the procedure.
Issue: The primary issue was whether the hospital's practice of administering ECT without muscle relaxants or restraints, and without informing Mr. Bolam of the risks, constituted negligence. The case questioned whether a professional's conduct should be judged based on adherence to a body of accepted medical practice.
Held: The Court of Appeal, led by Justice McNair, ruled in favor of the hospital. The court held that the standard of care required from medical professionals is defined by what a responsible body of medical opinion considers acceptable. In this case, expert evidence confirmed that the practice of not using relaxants or restraints was accepted by a responsible body of medical practitioners, and therefore, the hospital was not found negligent.
Key Judicial Statement: Justice McNair stated, "A medical professional is not negligent if they act in accordance with a practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical men skilled in that particular art." This statement established the Bolam test, which assesses professional negligence based on whether the conduct aligns with accepted practices within the profession.
💡 LevelUpLaw: Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee introduced the Bolam test, which became the cornerstone for evaluating negligence in cases involving skilled professionals. The test provided that as long as a professional's conduct aligns with the accepted practices of a responsible body of opinion, they are not considered negligent. However, this principle was significantly revisited and revised by the Supreme Court in Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board [2015], particularly in matters of informed consent. Montgomery shifted the focus from a purely professional standard to a more patient-centric approach, emphasizing the need for doctors to consider and inform patients of risks from their perspective, marking a significant evolution in the legal standards for informed consent.